Mistakes that would have some rolling in their graves

That legendary declaration, offered after the publication of a mistaken obituary, was uttered over a century ago, but, unfortunately, similar errors are being resurrected today.

Just last week, for example, former President George H.W. Bush announced the death of Nelson Mandela declaring, “Barbara and I mourn the passing of one of the greatest believers of freedom we have had the privilege to know.”

The only problem with the statement was that Mandela wasn’t dead. In fact, he was released from the hospital that same day.

One week earlier, I was drawn to a story in the U-T that started, “Carrie Minney could have sworn the woman in the casket was her 50-year-old daughter.”

Turns out the woman the family buried was not their loved one but a lookalike, a fact they discovered when the real daughter showed up 13 days after her family thought they had laid her to rest.

My own experience with such a blunder was some 10 years ago when an obituary appearing in the North County Times reported the passing of an acquaintance. I didn’t know her that well, but I felt it would be a nice gesture to stop by to offer condolences to the family. So, with bouquet in hand, I knocked on the door only to be greeted by …

The deceased.

That, as you might imagine, was a very awkward encounter. I didn’t know what to say. Several options ran through my head: “Aren’t you supposed to be dead?” “Do you mind if I check your pulse?” “Do you have a twin?”

But before I had a chance to make a fool of myself, a sympathetic, upright woman sought to calm me, explaining she was alive and well and aware of the faulty obituary. She could sense I was rather distressed, implying I looked like I must have seen a ghost. In a strange and paradoxical moment, at a time when I was intending to comfort the family of the deceased, it was the deceased who was consoling me.

To be fair, the error was perhaps not quite as blatant as it may sound. The actual obituary was about a family member, and the lady in question was erroneously listed as someone who “preceded” that person in death. They meant to identify her as one who “survived” the decedent.

I know the paper published a correction, but I can’t recall how it was expressed. All I know is they said she was dead one day and alive the next. I guess that’s what they mean by the power of the press.

I don’t envy the reporter who was tasked with the challenge of writing such a sensitive and delicate follow-up, knowing it had to be a correction and an apology. I suppose it must have gone something like this:

“On Monday, we mistakenly identified Jane Doe as being deceased. We wish to correct the record and report that she is very much alive and we are truly sorry.”